Abstract:
Despite a general consensus and recognition of the importance of the “social gradient” on nutritional standards and ultimately people's health, the body of literature identifying and describing the actual underlying social mechanisms which could explain this association is small, fragmented and not contained within one single discipline of thought – the effects of this conundrum seem easier to describe than to explain. The aim of this article is therefore to explore and identify social mechanisms, which could help explain why people with low socio-economic status consume a disproportionate amount of unhealthy foods and therefore also observe poorer diets. It is therefore in many ways an exploration into the nature of (relative) poverty. The point of departure for this exploration and identification is historical descriptions (in the form of excerpts) from George Orwell's (1937) book “The Road to Wigan Pier” on the living conditions of the British working classes. These descriptions will be aligned with results from contemporary research into nutritional behaviour. Strong similarities are identified between George Orwell's historical descriptions of the working-class's unhealthy diet and the findings from contemporary research into nutritional behaviour of people with a low socio-economic status. The article, on this basis, argues that certain social mechanisms influencing nutritional choices are readily identifiable across disciplines, and even partly reproduced in different historical, social and spatial contexts, with stronger negative (ill health) consequences for people with low socio-economic status especially. Finally the article discusses how social mechanisms affecting our nutritional choices could challenge the underlying rationalities and assumptions of the rational yet “knowledge deficient” individual consumer implicitly present in much nutritional advice – both past and present. The disregard of social mechanisms, and therefore implicitly issues of class, could indicate a general “de-socialization” of nutritional advice also in its dispersal through various health-promotion initiatives and campaigns, which raises serious questions about the usefulness of much nutritional advice, already tentatively questioned by some nutritionists (Burr et al., 2007) as well as “food” sociologists (Smith & Holm, 2010).